Alex Newman New American
Oct 27, 2012The United Nations and a broad coalition of its totalitarian-minded member governments are increasingly demanding
that a global regulatory regime be imposed over the Internet, with
supposed concerns about “terrorism” becoming just the most recent
argument advanced to support the controversial scheme. In a massive report
released this week, the UN claimed a planetary agreement on
surveillance, data retention, and more would be needed for “terror”
purposes.Of course, the latest round of UN scheming drew swift criticism from
Internet-freedom advocates. But as the effort by governments to seize
control over the World Wide Web gains traction, activists from across
the political spectrum argue that the Internet should remain free and
unregulated in the hands of citizens and the private sector — certainly
not under the purview of a scandal-plagued international organization
composed largely of dictatorial regimes.Unveiled at a recent conference in Vienna, the 148-page UN Office on Drugs and Crime (UNODC) report, entitled The Use of the Internet for Terrorist Purposes,
presents a broad wish list of powers that self-styled international
“authorities” believe are needed. It was prepared in collaboration with
the UN “Counter-Terrorism Implementation Task Force,” which includes the
World Bank, Interpol, the World Health Organization, and the
International Monetary Fund as members.However, the dubious document quickly sparked global concerns. Among
the most alarming claims in the report, according to critics, is that
“one of the major problems confronting all law enforcement agencies is
the lack of an internationally agreed framework for retention of data
held by [Internet Service Providers].”In other words, the UN wants a planetary regime to force companies to
spy on their customers, keep the data, and hand it over to authorities.
The international organization noted approvingly that entities such as
the European Union were already working to impose the measures. However,
not all governments are on board yet, the report complained.Social networking services such as Facebook and Twitter were
specifically highlighted as potential tools for “terrorists” to spread
“propaganda” and “extremist rhetoric.” Apparently now “terrorists” are
able to “abuse” free speech by spreading their messages more easily,
according to the report, which also notes that search engines have made
it easier to find “terror propaganda” online.“Content that might formerly have been distributed to a relatively
limited audience … has increasingly migrated to the Internet,” the UN
observed in what analysts ridiculed as “sort of obvious.” It also added, unsurprisingly, that “such content may be distributed using a broad range of tools.”So,
the UN and its members must take action, the report claims. “Terrorist
use of the Internet is a transnational problem, requiring an integrated
response across borders and among national criminal justice systems,”
the global body argued, echoing similar calls for UN empowerment on
everything from finance, taxes, “climate change” (formerly known as
“global warming” and “global cooling”), mental health, food markets,
oceans, sustainability, and virtually every sphere of human existence.There is much more where that came from, however. The report also
claims, for example, that websites and services such as Skype should
keep records of users’ communications. Mobile phone services should also
keep tabs on consumers’ locations, it added. Even publicly accessible
wireless (WiFi) Internet providers should work to abolish anonymity
because some potential criminal or “terrorist” might try to use the Web
anonymously.“Potential terrorists use advanced communications technology, often
involving the internet to reach a worldwide audience with relative
anonymity and at a low cost,” UNODC Executive Director Yury Fedotov said
in releasing the report, citing arguments long-relied upon by the
ruthless Communist Chinese dictatorship to justify its Orwellian
censorship of the Internet. “Just as internet use among regular, lawful
citizens has increased in the past few years, terrorist organizations
also make extensive use of this indispensable global network for many
different purposes.”To deal with the alleged problems, the UN highlights multiple
proposed schemes. The document touts certain “legal instruments” adopted
by regional regimes in the fight to rein in the free Internet, for
example. Also promoted in the report is the adoption of “model
legislation” around the world. “While model legislation provides
advisory guidelines, rather than legally binding obligations, it plays
an important role in harmonizing legal standards among States,” the
report observed.One of the primary UN entities being groomed to become the global Internet policing authority
is the International Telecommunications Union, which dictators around
the world have been working hard to empower in recent years. “ITU has
developed the Toolkit for Cybercrime Legislation (2010) to promote
harmonized national cybercrime legislation and procedural rules,
including with respect to acts of terrorism committed by using the
Internet,” the latest report explains.Ironically, all of the efforts to allegedly deal with “terrorists”
using the Internet would be made more difficult by the fact that the UN
has not even defined terrorism. “There is currently no comprehensive
United Nations treaty on terrorism, nor is there an official definition
of the term ‘terrorism,’” the document acknowledges on page 133. What
exactly the UN means by “propaganda” and “extremist rhetoric” is also
unclear, but communist regimes hope to ban criticism of their own autocracies while Islamists hope to criminalize criticism of Islam. Analysts, however, said the UN plot to take over the Internet and
expand its powers has essentially nothing to do with either terror or
propaganda. Instead, critics of the scheme argued, the establishment is
getting nervous about the Internet — possibly the final bastion of true
free speech in the world — and is working to crack down on it now,
before the people of the world wake up and remove the shackles of
tyranny.“The powers-that-be have decided that they need to track user details
on the Internet to prevent crime…. The ultimate goal is world
government and it is being built via ever-more authoritarian means,” noted analysts at the liberty-minded Daily Bell, which has been vigorously defending Internet freedom as the potential key to advancing human freedom throughout the world.In essence, then, the UN hopes to facilitate tyranny. “What we call
the Internet Reformation has made it more difficult for the power elite
to utilize dominant social themes — fear-based promotions — to frighten
middle classes into giving up wealth and control to globalist
institutions like the UN,” the analysts observed. “As a result, the
elites wish to attack and control the Internet.”Heavyweight defenders of free speech and an open Internet, however,
insist that the fight must go on. “For the first time in human history,
supporters of liberty around the world can share information across
borders quickly and cheaply. Without the filter of government censors,
this information emboldens millions to question governments and promote
liberty,” wrote
Rep. Ron Paul (R-Texas), a hero to freedom activists around the world.
“This is why liberty-minded Americans must do everything possible to
oppose — and stop — government attempts to censor or limit the free flow
of information online.”While the coalition of communist and Islamist tyrants try to rein in Internet freedom at the global level,
the United States has also seen an unprecedented federal assault on the
open Internet as well. The Department of Justice, various special
interests groups, and lawmakers in both parties, for instance, have been
fiendishly working to adopt everything from a federal “cybersecurity”
regime to data-retention schemes similar to the plan outlined by the UN.For Internet freedom activists, though, government regulation or
control of the Internet is off the table and non-negotiable. First of
all, the U.S. Constitution does not allow even the federal government to
regulate the Web, much less the UN; and if either gets its foot in the
door, restoring liberty online would be extremely difficult. Even if it
were constitutional, however, activists say letting any government
regulate the Internet would be a terrible idea for numerous reasons.

"God so loved the world that He gave His only Son, so that whoever believes in Him should not perish, but have everlasting life." John 3:16.
"For whosoever shall call upon the name of the Lord shall be saved." Romans 10:13